Islamabad’s Governance Dilemma
Bahadur Ali Khan
Islamabad: For more than four decades, Islamabad has grown from a carefully planned federal capital into a city of more than 2.4 million people, yet its residents remain without a directly elected government capable of making laws and taking full responsibility for everyday civic affairs.
The debate has gained fresh momentum after a government committee led by Federal Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal presented Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif with an ICT Governance Model in June 2026. The proposal envisages a 27-member elected assembly for Islamabad, potentially marking the biggest change to the capital’s governance structure since its existing administrative framework was introduced in 1980.
Under the proposed model, 21 assembly members would be directly elected, while five seats would be reserved for women and one for minorities. The assembly would then elect a Chief Minister or Mayor, creating, for the first time, a political leadership structure directly answerable to Islamabad’s residents.
The proposal addresses a long-standing problem at the heart of the capital’s administration: responsibility for Islamabad is currently divided among several federal institutions.
The Capital Development Authority (CDA) oversees development and infrastructure, the ICT Administration manages areas including law and order and revenue under an unelected Chief Commissioner, while the Islamabad Metropolitan Corporation (MCI) is intended to perform municipal functions but has not held fresh elections since 2015.
For residents, this fragmented structure can make accountability difficult. A civic problem may involve several institutions, while the person ultimately responsible is often not someone voters can directly remove from office.
The absence of a local legislature creates another layer of difficulty. Islamabad has no provincial or territorial assembly of its own, meaning legislation specifically affecting the capital is passed by Parliament. Even matters such as local taxation must pass through the National Assembly.
The political representation of the capital is also limited. Islamabad elects only three members to the National Assembly, leaving residents without the broader legislative representation available to citizens living in provinces.
In December 2024, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani disposed of the petition while observing that Islamabad required its own legislative assembly to better protect citizens’ rights. The court also called for engagement between the federal government and political stakeholders over the possibility of a constitutional amendment.
Yawar also pursued a separate legal battle concerning Islamabad police recruitment, highlighting the absence of a dedicated Public Service Commission for the capital and concerns over residents having to compete for federal jobs without a local quota.
The roots of the current system go back to the Constitution and subsequent administrative arrangements. Article 258 places responsibility for the administration of the federal capital with the President, while Article 142(d) gives Parliament legislative authority over territories that are not provinces.
Presidential Order No. 18 of 1980 subsequently established an administrative structure headed by a federally appointed official. The position, later designated as Chief Commissioner, has remained unelected for 46 years.
The proposed governance model would fundamentally alter that arrangement by creating an Islamabad Capital Territory Government with wider responsibilities over sectors such as health, education, environment and public services.
It would also seek to consolidate the existing administrative framework through a single law, replacing the overlapping arrangements currently spread across the CDA, ICT Administration and MCI.
The proposal does not, however, envisage complete autonomy from the federal government. Law and order and master planning would remain under federal control because Islamabad hosts Parliament, the Supreme Court, diplomatic missions and the official residences and offices of the country’s top constitutional authorities.
In developing the proposed structure, policymakers have drawn lessons from other capitals, particularly Delhi and London.
Delhi has operated with an elected assembly and Chief Minister since 1991, although key areas such as police and land remain under central control. London, meanwhile, has an elected Mayor and 25-member Assembly with responsibilities covering areas such as transport, housing and strategic planning.
Islamabad’s proposed arrangement attempts to combine elements of both systems while adapting them to the constitutional position of Pakistan’s federal capital.
For ordinary residents, however, the central question is less about administrative design and more about accountability: who should be responsible when roads deteriorate, municipal services fail, development decisions are delayed or local policies need to change?
An elected assembly and political executive would not automatically solve those problems. But it could give citizens a clear political authority to question, challenge and ultimately vote out.
The proposed 27-member assembly could therefore represent more than a new layer of government. It could reshape the political relationship between Islamabad’s residents and the institutions that govern their city.
The proposed move could also reshape Islamabad’s administrative power structure, as an elected government may seek to redefine the roles and influence of the CDA, federal ministries and other key state institutions.
For a capital that has expanded far beyond the administrative needs for which its existing system was designed, the question now is whether Islamabad is ready to move from being simply the seat of the federal government to having a government of its own.
